No New Studies Mean No New Speeding Tickets

By
Mark Bigger
|May 30, 2016

If the state’s largest city cannot prove that drivers were speeding
in court, what does that say about alleged violations in Lamont and Bakersfield?

Recession-era staffing and budget cuts may now affect traffic enforcement,
according to a report presented to the Los Angeles City Council’s
transportation committee. For safety reasons, most traffic patrol officers
use radar or Lidar. However, about three-fourths of the city streets have
not been surveyed in the last ten years, and under California law, it
is illegal to use radar or Lidar on streets with out-of-date engineering
surveys. To solve the problem, the City Council wants to hire two new
engineers to reduce the backlog and lobby the Legislature to change the law.

Speeding enforcement is a big part of the city’s grandiose Vision
Zero, which seeks to end traffic fatalities in the City of Angels. But, “our hands have basically been tied” in terms of speeding enforcement, lamented LAPD Officer Troy Williams.

Handling Speeding Tickets

Defenses like these are especially critical in VC 22350 infractions and
other enhanced speeding tickets like in Bakersfield, or on downgrade trucker
violations for VC 22407 out of Lamont courthouse based for Grapevine tickets.

An attorney can often get the charges reduced to simple speeding. This
infraction has a much lower fine, less of an effect on auto insurance
rates, and is a Traffic School-eligible offense, in most cases.

Getting Legal Help

The aggressive attorneys at Bigger & Harman, APC, are committed to
giving individuals a voice when dealing with speeding and traffic tickets.
Call today at 661-349-9300 or email
attorney@markbigger.com to receive the personal professional attention you deserve. En español,
llame al 661-349-9755.

The information on this website is for general information purposes only.
Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual
case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt
or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.